Fukushima Atsuki, Ebihara Nobuyuki
Department of Ophthalmology, Kochi Medical School, Nankoku, Japan,
Adv Ther. 2014 Oct;31(10):1045-58. doi: 10.1007/s12325-014-0156-2. Epub 2014 Oct 1.
The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of olopatadine versus epinastine in healthy Japanese adults with a history of allergic conjunctivitis to Japanese cedar pollen.
This Phase IV double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial comprised three clinical visits over 30 days. Screening tests were performed to identify subjects with a history of allergic conjunctivitis to Japanese cedar pollen in terms of skin sensitivity and positive bilateral reactions to a conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) with Japanese cedar pollen at Visit 1, and confirmation by a positive bilateral CAC reaction at Visit 2. At Visit 3, the subjects were randomized to receive one drop of olopatadine HCl ophthalmic solution 0.1% (olopatadine) in the left or right eye (1:1 ratio). All subjects received one drop of epinastine HCl ophthalmic solution 0.05% (epinastine) in the contralateral eye as an active control. Five min later, the subjects underwent bilateral CAC tests with one drop of the allergen solution at the concentration that elicited positive reactions at Visits 1 and 2. Efficacy outcomes included the severity of ocular itching at 5, 7, and 15 min and the severity of conjunctival hyperemia at 7, 15, and 20 min after the CAC test, as graded by the investigator by biomicroscopy.
Fifty people participated in this study (25 per group). Olopatadine significantly reduced ocular itching at 7 and 15 min (both p<0.05) and conjunctival hyperemia at 7 and 20 min (p=0.0010 and p<0.05, respectively) after allergen exposure compared with epinastine. There were no adverse events for either treatment.
The results of this single-dose study suggest that olopatadine is superior to epinastine in terms of suppressing ocular itching and hyperemia induced by Japanese cedar pollen during CAC tests. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings in real-life settings.
本研究的目的是比较奥洛他定与依匹斯汀在有日本雪松花粉过敏性结膜炎病史的健康日本成年人中的疗效和安全性。
这项IV期双盲随机对照临床试验在30天内包括三次临床访视。在第1次访视时进行筛查试验,以确定有日本雪松花粉过敏性结膜炎病史的受试者,根据皮肤敏感性和对日本雪松花粉结膜过敏原激发试验(CAC)的双侧阳性反应来确定,在第2次访视时通过双侧CAC反应阳性进行确认。在第3次访视时,受试者被随机分配在左眼或右眼接受一滴0.1%盐酸奥洛他定滴眼液(奥洛他定)(1:1比例)。所有受试者在对侧眼接受一滴0.05%盐酸依匹斯汀滴眼液(依匹斯汀)作为活性对照。5分钟后,受试者用一滴在第1次和第2次访视时引起阳性反应浓度的过敏原溶液进行双侧CAC试验。疗效结果包括CAC试验后5、7和15分钟时眼部瘙痒的严重程度以及7、15和20分钟时结膜充血的严重程度,由研究者通过生物显微镜进行分级。
50人参与了本研究(每组25人)。与依匹斯汀相比,奥洛他定在过敏原暴露后7和15分钟时显著减轻了眼部瘙痒(均p<0.05),在7和20分钟时显著减轻了结膜充血(分别为p=0.0010和p<0.05)。两种治疗均未出现不良事件。
这项单剂量研究的结果表明,在CAC试验期间,奥洛他定在抑制日本雪松花粉引起的眼部瘙痒和充血方面优于依匹斯汀。需要进一步研究在实际环境中证实这些发现。